Reasonable adjustments for disabled student

Short answer

It depends on whether the attendance requirement is a genuine competence standard and, if it is not, whether adjusting it would be a reasonable step. A university in England and Wales has a legal duty to make reasonable adjustments for disabled students under the Equality Act 2010, and this can include altering attendance rules. But the duty is not unlimited, and there is an important distinction between ordinary requirements that must be adjusted where reasonable and genuine competence standards, which the university does not have to lower.

The legal framework

Universities and other higher education providers are covered by the Equality Act 2010. The responsible body of the institution owes a duty to make reasonable adjustments to disabled students. A person is disabled for these purposes if they have a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. The word “substantial” means more than minor or trivial, and “long-term” generally means it has lasted, or is likely to last, at least twelve months. Some conditions, such as cancer, HIV and multiple sclerosis, are treated as disabilities from diagnosis. Fluctuating and recurring conditions, and mental health conditions such as depression or anxiety, can qualify.

The reasonable adjustments duty has three limbs. The one most relevant to attendance is the duty to take reasonable steps to avoid the disadvantage where a provision, criterion or practice puts disabled students at a substantial disadvantage compared with students who are not disabled. A rule requiring a fixed level of attendance is a provision, criterion or practice. If it places a disabled student at a substantial disadvantage, for example because their impairment causes fluctuating capacity, hospital appointments, fatigue or episodic absence, the duty to consider adjustment is engaged.

The duty is anticipatory as well as reactive. Providers are expected to think ahead about the needs of disabled students generally, not only to react once an individual asks.

The key exception: competence standards

The critical distinction is whether the attendance requirement is a competence standard. A competence standard is a standard applied to determine whether a person has a particular level of competence or ability. The duty to make reasonable adjustments does not require a provider to lower or waive a genuine competence standard. However, the way a competence standard is assessed can still be subject to adjustment.

This means the analysis usually runs as follows. If minimum attendance is truly integral to demonstrating the required competence, for example clinical placement hours in a nursing or medical programme, mandatory practical laboratory sessions, or professional-body hours that must be completed to qualify, then the requirement itself may be a lawful competence standard that does not have to be reduced. Even then, the university should be able to justify that the attendance requirement genuinely measures competence rather than being an administrative convenience, and it must still consider whether the manner of meeting it can be adjusted, for example rescheduling sessions, allowing catch-up placements, or extending the period to complete the required hours.

By contrast, if the attendance rule is really a monitoring or engagement policy, or a blanket institutional requirement not tied to the academic competence being assessed, it is far less likely to be a competence standard. In that situation the university will ordinarily be expected to adjust it where doing so is reasonable, for example by disregarding disability-related absence, allowing remote or recorded attendance, permitting flexible deadlines, or providing lecture materials in another form.

The Office of the Independent Adjudicator, which handles student complaints against higher education providers in England and Wales, advises in its Good Practice Framework that providers should have a flexible attendance policy and should specifically consider whether a specified level of attendance is a competence standard before treating absence as a problem, and should look at the student’s medical evidence when deciding.

What “reasonable” means

Whether a particular adjustment is reasonable is judged objectively and depends on the circumstances. Relevant factors include how effective the adjustment would be in removing the disadvantage, its practicability, the cost, the resources of the institution, the effect on academic standards and on other students, and the availability of other means of support such as Disabled Students’ Allowances. There is no fixed list of adjustments the university must make. The test is what steps it is reasonable for it to take.

Common attendance-related adjustments that are often reasonable include not counting disability-related absences against the student, allowing recorded lectures or remote participation, rescheduling or offering alternative sessions, extending timescales, providing notes in advance, and building flexibility into engagement monitoring so that absence triggers support rather than penalty. The cost of an adjustment cannot be passed on to the disabled student.

How the facts change the answer

The outcome turns on several things you have not yet set out, and different facts would produce different results.

First, does the student meet the legal definition of disability, and is there medical or other evidence to support both the impairment and its effect on attendance. The duty only arises for a disabled person, and the university is entitled to see appropriate evidence.

Second, what type of course and requirement is in issue. A theory-only module with an attendance monitoring rule is very different from a regulated professional programme with mandatory placement hours set by a professional or statutory body. The stronger the link between attendance and the actual competence being assessed, the more likely the requirement is a lawful competence standard.

Third, what is the reason for the requirement. If the university can show the attendance rule genuinely measures required ability, it is on stronger ground. If it is administrative or a general engagement expectation, it is weaker.

Fourth, whether the university knew or ought reasonably to have known of the disability. The duty to make individual adjustments is stronger once the university is on notice, though the anticipatory element applies more broadly.

Practical next steps

1. Gather the evidence. Obtain medical or specialist evidence confirming the impairment, its long-term nature, and how it affects attendance. This is central both to establishing disability and to justifying particular adjustments.

2. Engage the university’s disability or student support service. Ask for a formal assessment of needs and a support plan or learning agreement setting out agreed adjustments. Registering the disability formally puts the university clearly on notice.

3. Ask the university, in writing, to confirm whether the attendance requirement is treated as a competence standard and, if so, on what basis. This forces the institution to justify the requirement and clarifies whether the debate is about the standard itself or the way it is met.

4. Propose specific, workable adjustments. Concrete suggestions, such as disregarding disability-related absence, remote attendance, rescheduled sessions or an extended timeframe, are more likely to succeed than a general request.

5. Explore Disabled Students’ Allowances and any specialist support that could reduce the disadvantage, as the availability of such support forms part of what is reasonable.

6. If the university refuses, use its internal complaints and appeals procedure. Keep everything in writing and preserve correspondence.

7. If the internal process does not resolve matters, you can complain to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education, which reviews unresolved student complaints against providers in England and Wales, normally after the internal process is complete. A disability discrimination claim under the Equality Act can also be brought in the County Court, and there are strict time limits for court claims, generally six months, so the timing of any legal action should be considered carefully alongside the complaint route.

Bottom line

The university must make reasonable adjustments for a disabled student, and adjusting attendance requirements is often a reasonable and expected step, particularly where a rule is really about monitoring engagement. What it does not have to do is lower a genuine competence standard, where a certain level of attendance is truly essential to demonstrate the ability the qualification certifies. Even then, it should consider adjusting how that standard is met. The answer in any individual case depends on whether the student is disabled in law, whether the attendance rule is a genuine competence standard, and what specific adjustments would be reasonable in the circumstances.